Chumo & 2 others v Lelei (Civil Case 63 of 2021) [2025] KEELC 3876 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court allowed a party to withdraw a court application without opposition, but left the question of who pays costs open for later.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether an unopposed application for withdrawal of a substitution application should be allowed and on what costs terms
The withdrawal was allowed and costs awarded in the cause, there being no objection from any party.
The applicant sought to withdraw the application dated 18th February 2025 (seeking substitution of the 4th plaintiff Philip Chumo with Irene Chepkemboi Koskei) to pave the way for a later application dated 18th March 2025. Both the defendant in the suit and the 5th defendant in the counter claim raised no objection, subject to costs. The court invoked its discretion on costs under the proviso to section 27 of the Civil Procedure Act and found the withdrawal meritorious, marking the application withdrawn with costs in the cause.
Legal principles established
#- The court has discretion to award costs of an application withdrawn, per the proviso to section 27 of the Civil Procedure Act.
Court orders
#- 1.The application dated 18th February 2025, together with the notice of appointment of advocate of even date, marked as withdrawn with costs in the cause
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Discretion to award costs under the proviso to section 27 of the Civil Procedure Act, Chapter 21, Laws of Kenya
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Chumo & 2 others v Lelei (Civil Case 63 of 2021) [2025] KEELC 3876 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/3876/eng@2025-04-07
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.